Three issues that worry me about Farke and his tactics

[westcoastcanary 173]

[quote user="king canary"]@Westcoast

I''ve considered why he did what he did- it was a reactive double change to conceding an unexpected late goal (in my opinion). Based on that I still think a change or two earlier to give Ipswich something different to think about and some fresh legs may have allowed us to have taken the lead and not needed a 95 minute equalizer. Farke does have a habit of leaving his substitutions late and it isn''t something I personally agree with. I like managers to be dynamic and proactive in trying to change a game from the bench.[/quote] [Y] Yes, it was undoubtedly a "reactive double change to conceding an unexpected late goal". But that doesn''t mean it was too late to have any effect, or that there was no rationale to it.  Nor does it imply there was anything wrong with Farke''s strategy of not making more substitutions earlier. 

You say doing so "may" have allowed us to take the lead, but as others have pointed out, we were anyway controlling the game and creating chances throughout the period when the substitutions you''d have liked to have seen would have taken place and making those substitutions might equally well have upset our rhythm and domination. So your "may have allowed us to take the lead" needs to be set against e.g. "may have disrupted our control of the game, "may have reduced the number of chances created", "may have caused our guard to drop", "may have enabled Ipswich to take an earlier lead", and so on. What I''m saying is that, among the welter of opinions, DF''s opinions deserve to be taken a bit more seriously.

We all like managers to be proactive in trying to change the game from the bench -- just so long, as when they are, the game changes in our favour. 

@Rogue Baboon

Come off it RB, you know perfectly well that''s not what I said.

[Parma Ham's gone mouldy 2,219]

Football is maths, odds, probability.

You are not trying to score the most conceivable goals in a game, play your best 11 players or even engineer a win.

You are trying to move the odds in your favour. Nothing more, nothing less.

Thus if you are - on the balance of play, to an analytical coach - ‘ahead on points’ consistently on the balance of play, the advantage lies in not changing.

When circumstances change, you change and change significantly enough to alter the course of events. You accept less control - change can work against you and you are altering the connecting dynamics that you have meticulously set up from the start - so you typically do this when things have gone against you.

This is reacting, but it need neither be illogical or negative. It is possible that all your planning turned out exactly as you had predicted giving you excellent 5/6 odds on the die, only for the opposition to roll a lucky 6.

This is where coaches and managers do - and must - see beyond the result to the pattern of play, performance and inherent likelihood of events based on the shape of the tactics (balance of power - mental, technical and tactical). One must remain empirical and somewhat dispassionate to achieve this. It is inevitable that fans finendo this difficult and are mostly (and understandably) unable to do it.

Norwich was hugely superior in the second half. Ipswich scores a low rent goal entirely against the run of play. It was caused by a technical error by Jamal Lewis that was felt instantly by all.

Even if the score had finished 0-1, Norwich were vastly superior in play, methodology and thought processes. It would not have changed my view of the game at all.

Farke correctly reacted to events. To changed circumstances. He gambled when the odds went against him. There was no reason to do so when they were in his favour.

It is hard for fans to remain as cool when they only focus on the benefits a decision can bring. The overall equation requires an entirely different rationale and mindset.

Parma

[king canary 7,560]

Again, you''re putting words in my mouth.

I never claimed Farke was an idiot with substitutions and I never claimed there was no rationale to what he did- I just offered my opinion that changes earlier in the game could have made the difference and that giving players less than 5 minutes to change a game isn''t giving them much of a shot- I reckon if you asked most players how much influence they can have in that time they''d agree.

You''re the one who claimed it to be ''genius.''

[hogesar 9,609]

Great post Parma. I love reading an actual coaches view on the tactical side of our game. Learnt quite a bit from it too!

[Darth Canary1 91]

Agreed Hog, Parma''s post are always excellent, though not always appreciated on here which is a shame

[vos 155]

Parma is obviously a modern day football coach. Far too much theory with really little mention of the basics. Football is a fairly simple game and in common with the original poster I still have considerable doubts about DF - who by the way is getting an easy ride with the EDP !!! I would list my concerns as follows:

1) He spends too much time worrying about the opposition and adjusting tactics etc. He should place us in the position of let them worry about us.

2) Particularly at home we never seem to start on the front foot and take the game to the opponents.

3) Our slow build up whereby we continually play square balls in the front of the opponents defence has already proved "we never look like scoring".

4) Because of the tactics (3) we rarely find people in space and it is a continual theme of short ineffective passes going to tightly marked players. Very little use of the ball over the top to run on to.

5) It sometimes seems a fitness issue, but the midfield players are slow to support the lone striker when we occasionally make progress down the flanks.

6) It is pointless to bring on subs for the last 5 minutes.

To be fair I do think he is doing a reasonable job in bringing on some of the youngsters and thankfully has avoided (or not been allowed) to bring in a lot of highly paid players of mediocre ability who have found their way in to English football. After these observations we will probably go and win at Molineux but I think he still has a lot to learn.

[DDD In The Fine City 1]

Farke hasn''t got it right at home all season, look at our results it''s relegation form and embarrassing, I can only think of one game we''ve made it look easy and that game we were losing at half time, yet again on Sunday he decided to not change it while pretty much every fan in the crowd could see what was likely to happen, a last minute goal saved him for major criticism after the game.

[komakino 272]

Many fans bang on about next season, but there is nothing to suggest it will be anything other than more of the same. Farke''s type of football is boring and ineffective at home, but better away.

He''s too methodical for me, we just haven''t got the personnel to play his type of football to the level of promotion standard.

[hogesar 9,609]

I mean our home form isn''t great but it certainly isn''t relegation form. Home table alone we are 17th, I believe.

[Woodman 92]

I''d be interested in people''s thoughts on the earlier substitution of Srbeny for Murphy, when Hernandez was on the bench as well. We haven''t seen enough to judge either player yet, but I''d have thought a quick wide player might have profited more against a tiring defence. Easy with hindsight of course.

[DDD In The Fine City 1]

Go back 4 games hog and we were second worst with only Birmingham recording less wins, no reason it won''t head that way again before the end of the season, or are you suggesting Farke has us playing well at home?

[Rogue Baboon 0]

Our last 4 home games are probably 4 of the hardest as well - Fulham, Villa, Cardiff and Leeds. All 4 will be fighting for something it seems, either promotion or playoffs.

ALTHOUGH because they are fighting they may into our hands and allow us to play how we want to play

[king canary 7,560]

We''re 17th in the ''home'' table so not relegation form but clearly not near enough to be challenging for promotion. Only the bottom 4 teams and Reading have less home wins than us.

Now 4 of those 5 home wins have come in the last 6 home games so maybe Farke''s tactics at home are beginning to take effect.

[DDD In The Fine City 1]

Or we got lucky winning by a single goal

[king canary 7,560]

I don''t feel we were lucky v Millwall, Birmingham or Sheffield Wednesday. Middlesbrough you can argue based on the red card but that is football.

We did see v Ipswich the limits of our home form though- all it takes is once set piece, lucky deflection or stunner and we''re unlikely to get more than a point. The circumstances of the late equaliser on Sunday have masked the fact we barely scraped a point at home against a very average side though.

[Rogue Baboon 0]

Isn''t it 3 home wins in 6? Not 4?

Home wins v Sheff Weds, Millwall & Boro, draw v Ipswich, defeats v Sheff utd & Brentford?

Although I completely agree about the Ipswich game. Despite dominating the 2nd half and not letting Ipswich have a kick we still managed to find ourselves behind, and the ONLY shot on target from inside the box was after we had been forced to stick 2 CBs upfront because we were losing. The circumstances felt great,m but still 2 points dropped in my opinion.

[king canary 7,560]

You''re right, I had counted Birmingham as a home game, dunno why.

[komakino 272]

It most certainly was two points dropped, but Farke''s tactics get a far too easy ride. I want to be entertained, not bored to death by his uninspiring style brand of football. ''Farkelife'' is boring. Where we would be without Maddison I dread to think, though I''m sure somebody on here has worked the stats out.

[hogesar 9,609]

I quite enjoy watching this style of football. Also, it''s hard to take you seriously Komakino with all your Delia based lies in the past.

As for ''lucky'' 1-0''s... I''m not sure.

We don''t score enough but that''s not just down to tactics. Our main striker spent weeks sulking, presumably hoping for a move, occasionally showing up or the cameras but not much else. Since then he''s knuckled down but hideously out of form and has missed a few sitters, and a penalty. Thats equally responsible for the lack of goals.

Ipswich have scored more goals than us but at the start of their season they scored 4 goals in 7 shots across 3 games to get wins. NO simply hasn''t shown anywhere near that form.

Also working the stats out without Maddison would be pointless. Because it wouldn''t take into account whoever was potentially playing in his position.

[komakino 272]

[quote user="hogesar"]I quite enjoy watching this style of football. Also, it''s hard to take you seriously Komakino with all your Delia based lies in the past.

As for ''lucky'' 1-0''s... I''m not sure.

We don''t score enough but that''s not just down to tactics. Our main striker spent weeks sulking, presumably hoping for a move, occasionally showing up or the cameras but not much else. Since then he''s knuckled down but hideously out of form and has missed a few sitters, and a penalty. Thats equally responsible for the lack of goals.

Ipswich have scored more goals than us but at the start of their season they scored 4 goals in 7 shots across 3 games to get wins. NO simply hasn''t shown anywhere near that form.

Also working the stats out without Maddison would be pointless. Because it wouldn''t take into account whoever was potentially playing in his position.

[/quote]

You''re obviously more easily pleased than me. It isn''t good to watch as a whole, though that is purely subjective of course. I prefer football that is entertaining, has a purpose and of course, we all want results. Farke''s p*ssing about to get the top of the Stats league is not endearing. At least he hasn''t got the pressure of trying to get the club promoted.

"Steady as she gets Daniel, steady as she goes..."

[king canary 7,560]

"Also working the stats out without Maddison would be pointless. Because it wouldn''t take into account whoever was potentially playing in his position."

I see your point Hoegsar but I do think its worthwhile pointing it out and Maddison hasn''t just been good this season, he''s been exceptional.

He''s created more chances than any player in this League.

He''s created nearly double the chances of anyone else in this team.

He is our top scorer.

Whoscored have him rated as the 10th best performer in this division, Squawka have him as number 1. I don''t really like these rankings but its interesting to note.

Yes someone else would be playing there if he wasn''t- but I find it tough to believe it would be anyone having close to the impact of Maddison.

[DDD In The Fine City 1]

The home football this season has been worse than under Hughton

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

hogesar, I think your agenda against Oliveira has got you missing the point.

How many times do we actually get the ball into the box? How often do you see cut backs or any sort of box action? Hardly ever.

Therefore, our players have to shoot from distance, including NO. Note on Sunday that both he and Murphy did this on Sunday. Trybull, Maddison etc have all had to score out of nothing, or from penalties. How often do we genuinely craft goal scoring opportunities in the box?

Like Huckerby said on Sunday, Holt, Sutton, Ashton and Roberts would struggle to score goals in this side.

[Stone 0]

The intent is clear to see - building the play with a possession-based short passing game that will work the opposition over. My hope is that it''s still a work in progress because we fall short of creating the necessary opportunities...

- Movement seems to be lacking for much of the time. Players rarely seem to run ahead of the ball and overlap. It''s one of the issues of playing wing-backs, and our midfielders only rarely take the chance to make runs ahead of the striker.

- Individually too many players seem slow to move the ball, not helped by the lack of movement.

- As soon as an opposition team sits deep and shows a lack of forward momentum we struggle to break them down. Looking too positionally rigid and predictable.

- Nelson Oliveira is not ideally suited to the system - but has for some time been our only decent striking option. Cameron Jerome was even less well-suited on a technical level.

I think Farke needs a team of his own design, likely to take clearer shape after the next transfer window, before we can truly judge the effectiveness of his tactics. They''re so specific and rarely implanted at this level of English football.

[komakino 272]

[quote user="Stone"]The intent is clear to see - building the play with a possession-based short passing game that will work the opposition over. My hope is that it''s still a work in progress because we fall short of creating the necessary opportunities...

- Movement seems to be lacking for much of the time. Players rarely seem to run ahead of the ball and overlap. It''s one of the issues of playing wing-backs, and our midfielders only rarely take the chance to make runs ahead of the striker.

- Individually too many players seem slow to move the ball, not helped by the lack of movement.

- As soon as an opposition team sits deep and shows a lack of forward momentum we struggle to break them down. Looking too positionally rigid and predictable.

- Nelson Oliveira is not ideally suited to the system - but has for some time been our only decent striking option. Cameron Jerome was even less well-suited on a technical level.

I think Farke needs a team of his own design, likely to take clearer shape after the next transfer window, before we can truly judge the effectiveness of his tactics. They''re so specific and rarely implanted at this level of English football.[/quote]

Farke should play to the squad, not the system. It''s a bit like employing people to do the things their least good at. I see the theory of it, but the reality - especially in the Championship - is non promotion football that is largely uninspiring.

[king canary 7,560]

@Stone

I''d agree with that. We''re too happy to play the ball in-front of teams and while it is clearly designed to move teams about, it is at the moment a bit too slow to do that effectively.

You can have slow, patient build up but you need to be able to speed it up a bit when you get into the final third if you''re going to play through teams- you need to move defenders out of position both with you passing and movement and ideally get defenders facing their own goal when you go out wide. This was why I was really disappointed to see Pritchard leave as this is something he''s excellent at- constant movement, quick give and go''s and sharp passing. I''m hoping this is something Hernandez can provide.

[hampton canary 24]

Maddison, Leitner and Vrancic all have good vision and are capable of playing a quick ball to split packed defences, but unfortunately Murphy and Oliveira in particular, appear to just stand still most of the time. There were times on Sun when Maddison had three Ipswich players around him, but still couldn''t find a player to pass to in space.

Farke has mentioned he will make some changes for Wolves as we have 3 games in 6 days. Assuming he believes Murphy and Oliveira are his best striking options, and will need them for Bolton at home, perhaps he could start with Srbeny and Hernandez on Wed.

[westcoastcanary 173]

@Stone

[Y] Good post. There''s every reason to think your hope is well-founded. What we''re watching this season is most definitely a work in progress, as both Webber and Farke have said repeatedly. Contrary to vos''s comment about too little attention being paid to the basics, this season is all about the basics, which is actually why there are all the complaints from people demanding the team run before they can walk (just as there were, for similar reasons, when Hughton tried to address the deficiencies of the team he inherited from Lambert). As for your penultimate sentence, this season is also clearly about building "a team to [Farke''s] own design", including replacing those ill-suited, uncommitted or unable to adapt. 

My only disagreement is with your final comment about Farke''s approach being "so specific". That seems to me a highly insular view, thankfully becoming rapidly outdated "at this level of English football".

[ron obvious 1,495]

Spot on, hampton. it''s the lack of running into space - & not just running but intelligent running, pulling the opposition about & making space for team mates - which is our biggest problem.

Interesting to note that lately even players like Klose & Zimmermann occasionally break into the opposition half, which is I feel a sign of increasing confidence & can surprise opponents, but really it''s Josh, Nelson & midfielders who should be doing more. In fact I think it''s Josh who disappoints the most.

[hogesar 9,609]

Equally Hoola I can see why our players would look up and not play the ball into the box because NO is rarely in there or busting a gut to be.

Murphy had a few games where he consistently flashed balls across the box but got criticised because it went to no one. But no one was there. Including nelson.